RADIO

The Left Tried to COVER UP This Study on Police and Racism

The Left insists that America is plagued by “systemic racism,” especially from the Right. But Glenn has 2 stories that disprove this narrative and suggest that the Left is actually creating the racial divide. First, Glenn and Stu review what happened when author Coleman Hughes told The View that “colorblindness” should still be the goal. Then, they dive into the leftist fallout that a researcher faced when he decided to publish a scientific report that disproves the narrative that our police system is racist.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Put yourself in this scenario. You're on The View. Okay?

STU: Yes. You've been on The View.

GLENN: I have been on The View. I have. I have. So you're on The View. It's Easter Friday. Joy says something to you. Your response is?

STU: Shut up, Joy, you fat witch.

GLENN: No. No. No. That would not -- again, it's Good Friday.

STU: And Whoopi, you too, you old hag.

GLENN: Okay. No. That's not.

STU: Not the way to do it. We shouldn't do it that way on Good Friday. That's what we're trying to tell people.

GLENN: We probably shouldn't do it on average Wednesday, either. You know what I mean?

Probably shouldn't do that --

STU: That's true. I will say, my response is somewhat close to what you said, when you were on the -- when you were actually on The View.

GLENN: I think I was completely --

STU: Well, maybe in the aftermath.

GLENN: No! Wasn't -- yeah, in the aftermath. I think I tried to be nice the whole time.

STU: Yes. Certainly off the air -- we had that type of response at one point or another.

GLENN: Well, I don't know about that. That would be wrong of me.

There was a guy though, on The View. That I think we should play. That does demonstrate how people better than us actually respond.

STU: Yeah. This is Coleman Hughes, who is -- he wrote a book recently, which is a great book. It's about basically in defense of colorblindness.

Hey, maybe we shouldn't abandon the idea that colorblindness is the goal here, guys.

I can't believe you even need to write a book about this. He did, and it's very good.

And he went on The View. And, of course, they had to give him the ad hominem, charlatan question. Which is what you would expect, 100 percent from The View. When just praising the idea that we would be colorblind, this is the question he got.

VOICE: Your argument for colorblindness, I think, is something the right has co-opted. And so many in the black community, if I'm being honest with you, because I want to be. Believe that you are being used as a pawn by the right, and that you are a charlatan of sorts.

VOICE: He's not a Republican.

VOICE: You said that you were a conservative.

VOICE: No.

VOICE: No, you did. You actually said that on the podcast you did two weeks ago.

VOICE: I said I was a conservative?

VOICE: Yes. Yes, you did. So -- but my question to you -- my question to you is, how do you respond to those critics?

VOICE: Those critics.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. Stop right here.

STU: It's not her.

GLENN: Stop. Shut up you fat witch, does seem to be calling out to me for his response, you know what I mean?

STU: Right. And it wasn't Joy.

GLENN: Yeah. No. No. No. Then just buried deep inside of me, hearing that question, phrased that way. Shut up, you fat witch does seem to be an option.

STU: And what we're trying to say, on this day, that's the wrong option.

That's not what you should do. It would feel good in the moment.

GLENN: Right. You are only human.

I don't think even though Jesus was part human. I don't think that was an option that he felt.

But you, me, probably would feel that way.

But here's how he responded.

GLENN: I think it's very important. The quote that you just pointed out, about doing something special for the Negro, that's from the book, Why We Can't Wait, that I just mentioned. A couple paragraphs later, he lays out exactly what that something special was, and it was the Bill of Rights for the disadvantaged, a broad class policy.

VOICE: But he also says, you must include race.

VOICE: Yes, he does.

VOICE: Okay. Well, everyone should go read the book, why you can't wait. Let's not get sidetracked by that.

I don't think I've been co-opted by anyone. I've only voted twice both for Democrats. Although, I'm an independent. I would vote for a Republican, probably a non-Trump Republican if they were compelling. I don't think there's any evidence I've been co-opted by anyone. And I think that that's -- that's an ad hominem tactic people use to not address really the important conversations we're having here. And I think it's better -- and better for everyone, it we stuck to the topics, without making it about me with no evidence.

VOICE: But I just -- I want to give you the opportunity to respond to the criticism.

VOICE: I appreciate it. There's no evidence I've been coopted by anyone. I have an independent podcast. I work for CNN as an analyst. I write for the free press. I'm independent in all of these endeavors. Is nobody is paying me to say what I say, I'm saying it, because I feel it.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So what he's saying there is, shut up, you fat witch.

I think that's what I heard. I think that's what I heard, just in a very nice way.

STU: Yeah. And he's -- he's good at just dismantling it with reason.

There's no evidence, this guy has been co-opted by the right.

These are arguments, we all used to agree on.

Outside of the KKK. If you weren't wearing a white hood, most people would say, hey, we shouldn't focus on skin color that much.
And now, 50 percent of the population, or at least 50 percent of our major political parties, have embraced an idea that we should only focus on race and gender and other immutable characteristics.

GLENN: And re-separate. Right.

STU: Yeah. It's horrific, that that has happened, under all of our watch at least if you're on the left. You've let this happen. And you should be on the side of Coleman Hughes and pushing back against it, and there are very few that are.

GLENN: You know, it's amazing to me, that the Democrats get stuck in about 1968.

You know what I mean? It's like they just stopped seeing new things. You know what I mean.

It's just like, well, you know what, that's why blacks should be able to go to school with whites.

And you're like, yeah.

Okay. We've believed that for now, 40, 50 years.

STU: Even longer.

GLENN: We've been on that. Yeah. We've been on that train, you know, white people.

Again, there are still some Klan members out there. That don't agree.

But there's also Joy Reid.

STU: Yeah. Yeah. That's the thing.

They have decided. Oh. The 1960s.

Hey, blacks should be able to go to school with whites. The left has reversed that. They now say they should have safe spaces away from whites. They've legitimately gone the exact opposite way. And they're acting as if we're the crazy ones.

GLENN: I know. I know. And we learned this -- my generation, I'm the last of the Boomer generation. Last year. And I grew up in a time, where I didn't see color. We didn't do that. You know,, I mean, it's not -- yes.

STU: They were people.

GLENN: When you're in a bad section of town, bad section of town, you might look over your shoulder.

Oh. Is that because it's black!

Why?

Because I said a bad section of town?

You all of a sudden assume that it's a black neighborhood? Here's the racist here. Who is the racist here?

You know -- you just don't do that.

And we have gotten to a place. Or we were at a place. To where we wanted to see people for the content of their character.

Thought that was right. And in many cases, that's the way we judged the world.

And it's as if all of these radicals, as if 1970. 1980. 1990. 2000.

2000 -- well, 2008, I think was the end of that.

I mean, it's like none of those years happened. Like all of the things.

All of the progress we made, didn't happen.

We're still in 1965.

In what world? In what world?

STU: Yeah. No. It's true.

You see the way these people retreated. Another interview that happened. It was a speech, I think. It was part of the free press. Which Coleman Hughes actually mentioned in that clip. They interviewed a guy who did a study -- an academic who did a police study against blacks. And the study came out in an interesting way. Not the way the media believed it would come out. Now, the man who is speaking, I don't have his -- I misplaced his name. But he's an African-American gentleman, who is describing a study he did, in academic circles to talk about violence against African-Americans by the police. Listen.

VOICE: I collected a lot of data. We collected millions of observations on everyday use of force, that wasn't lethal. We collected thousands of observations on lethal force. And it was in this moment, 2016. That I realized, people lose their minds, when they don't like the result.

So what my paper showed, you'll see tomorrow. Some of you was, yes, we saw some bias everyday pushing up against cars and things like that. People seemed to like that result.

But we didn't find any racial bias in police shootings.

Now, that was really surprising to me because I expected to see it. The little known fact is, I had eight full-time IRs that it took to do this, over nearly a year. When I found the surprising result, I hired eight fresh ones, and redid it.

To make sure they came up with the same exact answer. And I thought it was robust. And I went to go give it. And my God, all hell broke loose. It was 104-page academic economics paper with 150-page appendix, okay?
GLENN: Jeez.

VOICE: It was posted for four minutes. Then I got a response. It doesn't make any sense. And I wrote back, how did you read it that fast?

That's amazing. You are a genius.

And I had colleagues take me into -- to the side and say, don't publish this. You'll ruin your career. I said, what are you talking about? I said, what's wrong with it? Do you believe the first part?

Yes. Do you believe the second part?

Well, it's the issue is, they just don't fit together. We like the first one. But you should publish the second one, another time.

I said, let me ask this. If the second part about the police shootings. This is a literal conversation. I said to them, if the second part showed bias, do you think I should publish it then?

And they said, yeah. Then it would make sense. And I said, I guarantee you, I'll publish it. We'll see what happens.

So it was -- it was -- you know, I lived under -- under police protection, for about 30 or 40 days. I had a seven-day old daughter, at the time.

I remember going shopping for her. When you have a newborn. You think you have enough diapers. You don't. So I was going to the grocery store to get groceries with an armed guard. It was crazy. It was really, truly crazy.
STU: For just saying the truth and saying, hey. Maybe police aren't intentionally trying to commit a genocide on African-Americans. Something that I think everybody in their heart actually knows. But the evidence showed it was true. And because he published actual evidence about actual things that go on in our country, he had to live under police protection for months.

GLENN: Let me just leave it at this.

Shut up, you fat witch!

TV

The Globalist Elites' Dystopian Plan for YOUR Future | Glenn Beck Chalkboard Breakdown

There are competing visions for the future of America which are currently in totally different directions. If the globalist elites have their way, the United States will slide into a mass surveillance technocracy where freedoms are eroded and control is fully centralized. Glenn Beck heads to the chalkboard to break down exactly what their goal is and why we need to hold the line against these ominous forces.

Watch the FULL Episode HERE: Dark Future: Uncovering the Great Reset’s TERRIFYING Next Phase

RADIO

Barack & Michelle tried to END divorce rumors. It DIDN'T go well

Former president Barack Obama recently joined his wife Michelle Obama and her brother on their podcast to finally put the divorce rumors to rest … but it didn’t exactly work. Glenn Beck and Pat Gray review the awkward footage, including a kiss that could compete for “most awkward TV kiss in history.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Now, let me -- let me take you to some place. I think kind of entertaining.

Michelle Obama has a podcast. Who knew?

She does it with her brother. Who knew? It's -- you know, I mean, it's so -- it's a podcast with two brothers. Right?

And -- and it -- they wanted to address the rumors, that they're getting a divorce. And this thing seems so staged.

I want you to -- listen to this awkward exchange on the podcast.

Cut one please.

VOICE: Wait, you guys like each other.

MICHELLE: Oh, yeah. The rumor mill. It's my husband, y'all! Now, don't start.

OBAMA: It's good to be back. It was touch-and-go for a while.

VOICE: It's so nice to have you both in the same room today.

OBAMA: I know. I know.

MICHELLE: I know, because when we aren't, folks things we're divorced. There hasn't been one moment in our marriage, where I thought about quitting my man.

And we've had some really hard times. We've had a lot of fun times. A lot of adventures. And I have become a better person because of the man I'm married to.

VOICE: Okay. Don't make me cry.

PAT: Aw.

GLENN: I believed her. Now, this is just so hokey.

VOICE: And welcome to IMO.

MICHELLE: Get you all teared up. See, but this is why I can't -- see, you can take the hard stuff, but when I start talking about the sweet stuff, you're like, stop. No, I can't do it.

VOICE: I love it. I'm enjoying it.

MICHELLE: But thank you, honey, for being on our show. Thank you for making the time. We had a great --

VOICE: Of course, I've been listening.

PAT: What? No!

GLENN: They're not doing good. They're not doing good.

Okay. And then there was this at the beginning. And some people say, this was very awkward. Some people say, no. It was very nice.

When he walks in the room, he gives her a hug and a kiss. Watch.

Gives her a little peck on the cheek.

PAT: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

GLENN: Does that --

PAT: Does that look like they're totally into each other?

GLENN: Well, I give my wife a peck on the cheek, if she walks into a room.

PAT: Do you? If you haven't seen her in months and it seems like they haven't, would you kiss her on the cheek? Probably not.

GLENN: No, that's a little different. That would be a little different. But I wouldn't make our first seeing of each other on television.

PAT: Yeah, right, that's true. That's true.

GLENN: But, you know, in listening to the staff talk about this. And they were like, it was a really uncomfortable -- okay.

Well, maybe.

PAT: I think it was a little uncomfortable.

GLENN: It was a little uncomfortable.

It's still, maybe. Maybe.

But I don't think that rivals -- and I can't decide which is the worst, most uncomfortable kiss.

Let me roll you back into the time machine, to Michael Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley. Do you remember this kiss?
(applauding)

GLENN: He turns away, immediately away from the camera. Because he's like.

PAT: He was about to vomit. Yeah.

GLENN: It was so awkward. When that happened, all of us went, oh, my gosh. He has only kissed little boys. What are we doing? What is happening?

He doesn't like women, what is happening?

And then there's the other one that sticks out in my mind of -- and I'm not sure which is worse. The Lisa Marie or the Tipper in Al Gore.

VOICE: The kiss. The famous exchange during the 2000 democratic convention was to some lovely, to others icky.
(laughter)

GLENN: That's an ABC reporter. To some lovely, others icky.

And it really was. And it was -- I believe his global warming stuff more than that kiss.
(laughter)
And you know where I stand on global warming.

That was the most awkward kiss I think ever on television!

PAT: Yeah. It was pretty bad. Pretty bad.

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

So when people who are, you know -- these youngsters.

These days. They look at Barack and Michelle. They're like, that was an awkward kiss.

Don't even start with me.

We knew when we were kids, what awkward kisses were like.

PAT: The other awkward thing about that.

She claims, there was not been one moment in their marriage.

Where she's considered reeving him.

GLENN: Yeah.

PAT: She just said a while ago. A month or a year ago, she hated his guts for ten years. She hated it.

GLENN: Yeah. But that doesn't mean you'll give up.

PAT: I guess not. I guess not. Maybe you enjoy being miserable.

I don't know.

GLENN: No. I have to tell you the truth.

My grandmother when I got a divorce, just busted me up forever. I call her up, and I said, on my first marriage.

Grandma, we're getting a divorce.

And my sweet little 80-year-old grandmother, who never said a bad thing in her life said, excuse me?

And I said, what?

We're getting a divorce.

And she said, how dare you.

I said, what's happening. And she said, I really thought you would be the one that would understand. Out of everybody in this family, I thought you would understand.

And I said, what?

And she said, this just -- this just crushed me when she said it.

Do you think your grandfather and I liked each other all these years? I was like, well, yeah.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Kind of. And she said, we loved each other. But we didn't always like each other. And there were times that we were so mad at each other.

PAT: Yeah. Yeah. Uh-huh.

STU: But we knew one thing: Marriage lasts until death!

PAT: Did she know your first wife?

GLENN: Okay. All right. That's just not necessary.

RADIO

No, Trump’s tariffs ARE NOT causing inflation

The media is insisting that President Trump's tariffs caused a rise in inflation for June. But Our Republic president Justin Haskins joins Glenn to debunk this theory and present another for where inflation is really coming from.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins is here. He is the president of Our Republic. And the editor-in-chief of stoppingsocialism.com.

He is also the coauthor with me at the Great Reset, Dark Future, and Propaganda War.

So, in other words, I'm saying, he doesn't have a lot of credibility. But he is here to report -- I don't even think you're -- you're -- you were wrong on this, too, with the tariffs. Right?

JUSTIN: Well, at some point, I was wrong about everything.

GLENN: Yeah, right. We are all on the road to being right.

But this is coming as a shock. You called yesterday, and you said, Glenn, I think the tariff thing -- I think the president might be right.

And this is something I told him, if I'm wrong. I will admit that I'm wrong.

But I don't think I'm wrong.

Because this goes against everything the economists have said, forever.

That tariffs don't work.

They increase inflation.

It's going to cost us more.

All of these things. You have been study this now for a while, to come up with the right answer, no matter where it fell.

Tell me what's going on.

JUSTIN: Okay. So the most recent inflation data that came out from the government, shows that in June, prices went up 2.7 percent. In May, they went up 2.4 percent. That's compared to a year prior. And most people are saying, well, this is proof that the tariffs are causing inflation.

GLENN: Wait. That inflation is -- the target is -- the target is two -- I'm sorry.

We're not. I mean, when I was saying, it was going to cause inflation. I thought we could be up to 5 percent.

But, anyway, go ahead.

JUSTIN: So the really incredible thing though. The more you look at the numbers. The more obvious it is, that this does not prove inflation at all.

For starters, these numbers are lower, than what the numbers were in December and January.

Before Trump was president. And before we had any talk of tariffs at all.

So that is a big red flag right at the very beginning. When you dive even deeper into the numbers, what you see is there's all kinds of parts of the Consumer Price Index that tracks specific industries, or kinds of goods and services. That should be showing inflation, if inflation is being caused by tariffs, but isn't.

So, for example, clothing and apparel. Ninety-seven percent, basically.

About 97 percent according to one report, of clothing and apparel comes overseas, imported into the United States.

GLENN: Correct.

JUSTIN: So prices for apparel and clothing should be going up. And they're not going up, according to the data, they're actually going down, compared to what they were a year ago. Same thing is true with new vehicles.

Obviously, there were huge tariffs put on foreign vehicles, not on domestic vehicles. So it's a little bit more mixed.

But new vehicle price are his staying basically flat. They haven't gone up at all. Even though, there's a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and car parts. And then we just look at the overall import prices. You just -- sort of the index. Which the government tracks.

What we're seeing is that prices are basically staying the same, from what they were a year ago.

There's very, very little movement overall.

GLENN: Okay. So wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.

Wait.

Let me just -- let me just make something career.

Somebody is eating the tariffs. And it appears to be the companies that are making these things. Which is what Donald Trump said. And then, the -- you know, the economist always saying, well, they're just going to pass this on in the price.

Well, they have to. They have to get this money some place.

So where are they?

Is it possible they're just doing this right now, to get past. Because they know if they jack up their price, you know, they won't be able to sell anything. What is happening?

How is this money, being coughed up by the companies, and not passed on to the consumer.

JUSTIN: Yeah, it could be happening. I think the most likely scenario, is that they are passing it along to consumers. They're just not passing it along to American consumers.

In other words, they're raising prices elsewhere. To try to protect the competitiveness with the American market. Because the American market is the most important consumer market in the world.

And they probably don't want to piss off Donald Trump either, in jacking up prices. And then potentially having tariffs go up even more, as a punishment for doing that.

Because that's a real option.

And so I think that's what's happening right now.

Now, it's possible, that we are going to see a huge increase in inflation. In six months!

That's entirely possible.

We don't know what's going to happen. But as of right now, all the data is suggesting that recent inflation is not coming from consumer goods being imported, or anything like that.

That's not where the inflation is coming.

Instead, it's coming from housing.

That's part of the CPI at that time.

Housing is the cause of inflation right now.

GLENN: Wait. Wait. It's not housing, is it?

Because the things to make houses is not going through the roof. Pardon the pun. Right?

It's not building.

JUSTIN: No. No. The way the CPI calculates housing is really stupid. They look basically primarily at rent. That's the primary way, they determine housing prices.

GLENN: Okay.

JUSTIN: That so on they're not talking about housing costs to build a new house.

Or housing prices to buy a new house.

They are talking about rent.

And then they try to use rent data, as a way of calculating how much you would have to pay if you owned a house, but you had to rent the same kind of house.

And that's how they come up with this category.

GLENN: Can I ask you a question: Is everybody in Washington, are they all retarded?
(laughter)
Because I don't. What the hell. Who is coming up with that formula?

JUSTIN: Look. I mean, sort of underlying this whole conversation, as you -- as you and I know, Glenn.

And Pat too. The CPI is a joke to begin with.

GLENN: Right.

JUSTIN: So there's all kinds of problems with this system, to begin with.

I mean, come on!

GLENN: Okay. So because I promised the president, if I was wrong, and I had the data that I was wrong, I would tell him.

Do I have to -- out of all the days to do this.

Do I have to call him today, to do that?

Are we still -- are we still looking at this, going, well, maybe?

JUSTIN: I think there's -- I think there is a really solid argument that you don't need to make the phone call.

GLENN: Oh, thank God. Today is not the day to call Donald Trump. Today is not the day.

Yeah. All right.

JUSTIN: And the reason why is, we need -- we probably do need more data over a longer period of time, to see if corporations are doing something.

In order to try to push these cuts off into the future, for some reason. Maybe in the hopes that the tariffs go down. Or maybe -- you know, it's all sorts of ways, they could play with it, to try to avoid paying those costs today.

It's possible, that's what's going on.

But as of right now, that's not at all, what is happening. As far as I can tell from the data.

GLENN: But isn't the other side of this, because everybody else said, oh. It's not going to pay for anything.

Didn't we last month have the first surplus since, I don't know. Abraham Lincoln.

JUSTIN: Yes. Yes. We did. I don't know how long that surplus will last us.

GLENN: Yeah. But we had one month.

I don't think I've ever heard that before in my lifetime. Hey, United States had a surplus.

JUSTIN: I looked it up.

I think it was like 20 something years ago, was the last time that happened. If I remembered right.

It was 20 something years ago.

So this is incredible, really.

And if it works.

You and I talked about this before.

I actually think there is an argument to be made. That this whole strategy could work, if American manufacturers can dramatically bring down their costs. To produce goods and services.

So that they can be competitive.

And I think that advancements in artificial intelligence. In automation. Is going to open up the door to that being a reality.

And if you listen to the Trump administration talk. People like Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Commerce. They have said, this is the plan.

The plan is, go all in on artificial intelligence.

Automation. That's going to make us competitive with manufacturers overseas. China is already doing that.

They're already automating their factories. They lead the world in automation.

GLENN: Yeah, but they can take half their population, put them up in a plane, and then crash it into the side of the mountain.

They don't care.

What happens to the people that now don't have a job here? How do they afford the clothes that are now much, much cheaper?

JUSTIN: Well, I think the answer to that is, there's going to be significantly more wealth. Trillions of dollars that we send overseas, every year, now in the American economy. And that's going to go into other things. It's not as though -- when this technology comes along, it is not as though people lose their jobs, and that's it. People sit on their couch forever.

The real danger here is not that new markets will not arrive in that situation. And jobs with it. The problem is: I think there's a real opportunity here. And I think this is going to be the fight of the next election, potentially. Presidential election. And going forward.

Next, ten, 20 years. This is going to be a huge issue. Democrats are going to have the opportunity, when the AI revolution goes into full force. They will have the opportunity like they've never had before.

To say, you know what, we'll take care of you. Don't worry about it.

We're just going to take all of the corporate money and all of the rich people's money.

And we will print trillions of dollars more. And you can sit on your couch forever. And we will just pay you. Because this whole system is rigged, and it's unfair, and you don't have a job anymore because of AI. And there's nothing you can do. You can't compete with AI. AI is smarter than you.

You have no hope.

I think that's coming, and it is going to be really hard for free market people to fight back against that.

GLENN: Yes.

Well, I tend to agree with you.

Because the -- you know, I thought about this.

I war gamed this, probably in 2006.

I'm thinking, okay.

If -- if the tech is going to grow and grow and grow. And they will start being -- they will be responsible for taking the jobs.

They won't be real on popular.

So they will need some people that will allow them to stay in business, and to protect them.

So they're going to need to be in with the politicians.

And if the politicians are overseeing the -- the decrease of jobs, they're going to need the -- the PR arm of things like social media. And what it can be done.

What can be done now.

I was thinking, at the time. Google can do.

But they need each other.

They must have one another. And unless we have a stronger foundation, and a very clear direction, and I will tell you. The president disagrees with me on this.

I said, he's going to be remembered as the transformational AI president.

And he said, I think you're wrong on that.

And I don't think I am.

This -- this -- this time period is going to be remembered for transformation.

And he is transforming the world. But the one that will make the lasting difference will be power and AI.

Agree with that or disagree?

JUSTIN: 1,000 percent. 1,000 percent. This is by far the most important thing that is happening in his administration in the long run. You're projecting out ten, 20, 30 years ago years.

They will be talking about this moment in history, a thousand years from now. Like, that will -- and they will -- and if America becomes the epicenter of this new technology, they will be talking about it, a thousand years from now, about how Americans were the ones that really developed this.

That they're the ones that promoted it, that they're the ones that does took advantage of it.
That's why this AI race with China is so important that we win it.

It's one of the reasons why. And I do think it's a defining moment for his presidency. Of course, the problem with all of this is AI could kill us all. You have to weigh that in.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. Right.

Well, we hope you're wrong on that one.

And I'm wrong on it as well. Justin, thank you so much.

Thank you for giving me the out, where I don't have to call him today. But I might have to call him soon. Thanks, Justin. I appreciate it.

TV

The ONLY Trump/Epstein Files Theories That Make Sense | Glenn TV | Ep 445

Is the case closed on Jeffrey Epstein and Russiagate? Maybe not. Glenn Beck pulls the thread on the story and its far-reaching implications that could expose a web of scandals and lead to a complete implosion of trust. Glenn lays out five theories that could explain Trump’s frustration over the Epstein files and why Glenn may never talk about the Epstein case again. Plus, Glenn connects the dots between the Russiagate hoax, the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up, and the Steele dossier related to the FBI’s new “grand conspiracy” probe. It all leads to one James Bond-like villain: former CIA Director John Brennan. Then, Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA operations officer, tells Glenn why he believes his former boss Brennan belongs in prison and what must happen to prevent a full-blown trust implosion in American institutions.